[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Oops, incomplete patch. (fwd)
- Subject: Re: Oops, incomplete patch. (fwd)
- Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 08:55:53 -0600
>To: Russ Rew <address@hidden>
>From: "Stonie R. Cooper" <address@hidden>
>Subject: Re: 20020730: The significance of pbuf_flush messages.
>Organization: Planetary Data
>Keywords: pbuf_flush-problem, Linux file systems, ext2, ext3, reiserfs, fsck
------- Forwarded Message
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 01:23:25 -0000
From: "Stonie R. Cooper" <address@hidden>
To: Russ Rew <address@hidden>
cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
Subject: Re: Oops, incomplete patch.
Russ,
On Thursday 05 September 2002 15:42, Russ Rew wrote:
> Thanks for the information on this problem. Here's my summary of what
> you learned, let me know if I got it wrong:
>
> - On a Linux platfrom, use a simple ext2 file system partition for
> the LDM product queue, since reiserfs or ext3 will cause
> performance problems, with symptom lots of pbuf_flush messages.
That is correct - and it as the level of the kernel, not in user space (i.e.
not readily fixable); I haven't dug, and probably won't, but would guess it's
tied to the way the queue is maintained versus the journaling logging that
takes place with ext3 and reiserfs.
>
> - For even better performance, turn off the periodic file system
> checking with "tunefs -c -1".
This is only necessary if the "regularly" scheduled fsck's that occur with
ext2 annoy you. I prefer to only fsck when needed - and given file and
purpose of this particular filesystem, it seems silly to waste the time.
>
> I'm still not sure if the patch we provided to LDM 5.2 is also needed,
> but we're including it in 5.2.1 anyway ...
Any speedup without loss of stability is good - I don't think you wasted your
time.
>
> --Russ
--
Stonie R. Cooper
Planetary Data, Incorporated
ph. (402) 782-6611
------- End of Forwarded Message